China's Economic Invasion: One Year Later

The Heritage Foundation ^ | 18. April 2006 | Tim Kane, Ph.D., Marc Miles, Ph.D., and Anthony Kim

[1rudeboy]

Here ya' go. Knock yourself out.

[hedgetrimmer]

Of course you are ingoring what I said.

The Coast Guard went to the IMO

[1rudeboy]

Prove it.

[hedgetrimmer]

The Commandant came here, before the International Maritime Organization’s General Assembly, and urged the consideration of an international security strategy. Ultimately, a series of intersessional maritime security work group meetings, held at the direction of the Maritime Safety Committee, developed the new ISPS Code as an amendment to SOLAS.

--Rear Admiral Thomas Gilmour, May 10, 2005

[hedgetrimmer]

Now, I would like to turn to our domestic counterpart of the ISPS Code, found in U.S. regulations and standards, codified in Title 33 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 101-104, better known as the Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) regulations. From its inception, our regulations were written to be harmonized with the requirements of the ISPS Code. In aligning U.S. requirements with international requirements, the Coast Guard considered the best method of implementation would simply be to incorporate the ISPS Code provisions directly into our domestic regulations mandated by MTSA. And that’s exactly what we did. Therefore, a vessel meeting the requirements of the U.S. regulations is deemed to be in compliance with the ISPS Code. --Admiral Thomas Gilmour, May 10, 2005

[1rudeboy]

It is customary, when citing to a block of text while making a point, to include a brief indication of what that point actually is.

[1rudeboy]

So the MTSA was the enabling legislation? You are back to square one.

[1rudeboy]

Check this out. Did anybody realize that on or about 2002, the U.S. Coast Guard commited a coup d'etat and started enforcing international maritime regulations?

[1rudeboy]

I also thought it be best to add this, from Admiral Gilmour's presentation (of which you appear to be fond).

In the aftermath of September 11, 2001, the Commandant of the Coast Guard reaffirmed the maritime security mission to respond to threats posed by terrorist organizations, and our lead role in coordinating with other Federal, State, and local entities; owners and operators of vessels and marine facilities; and others with an interest in our Marine Transportation System. The Commandant came here, before the International Maritime Organization’s General Assembly, and urged the consideration of an international security strategy. Ultimately, a series of intersessional maritime security work group meetings, held at the direction of the Maritime Safety Committee, developed the new ISPS Code as an amendment to SOLAS.
Before each intersessional meeting, the Coast Guard held public meetings in the U.S. and coordinated several outreach meetings with representatives from major U.S. and foreign associations for shipping, labor, and port authorities. We also discussed maritime security at each of our Federal Advisory Committee meetings and held meetings with other Federal agencies with security responsibilities. Throughout this process, the Coast Guard received comments calling for specific threat identification, analysis, and performance standards to respond to maritime threats. Additionally, the domestic and international maritime industry stressed the importance of uniformity in the application and enforcement of requirements, and the need to establish threat levels with a means to communicate threat information to a variety of interest groups.
Because of the vast amount of public outreach and international coordination that went into its development, the Coast Guard considers the ISPS Code to reflect a consensus position, then and now. [emphasis in original]

[1rudeboy]

In light of the block of text I just quoted, do you think that you accurately demonstrated its context when you quoted a portion of the same? Just wondering. LOL

[hedgetrimmer]

1. In aligning U.S. requirements with international requirements

Somewhere there was a mandate to align US requirements with international requirements. WHO made it? HOW is it in the best interests of the American people and the WOT to align our wartime requirments with an international code?

2. the Coast Guard considered the best method of implementation would simply be to incorporate the ISPS Code provisions directly into our domestic regulations.

You are worse than I believed if you defend this usurpation of the Constitution.

[1rudeboy]

I think I remember that you served in the artillery. How would you describe what I've done to poor hedgetrimmer? I forget the terminology. Not FFE, but something else.

[1rudeboy]

Please demonstrate where, specifically, our maritime security strategy was compromised when we went through this entire process, including a 95-0 vote in favor in the U.S. Senate, and a voice vote in the House (unfortunate, because I won't find out how Rep. Paul voted).

And I am truly sorry about catching you misrepresenting Adm. Gilmour's remarks. It's brutal, but on a website such as this one you'd best prepare to be shamed.

[hedgetrimmer]

You told me to prove the involvement of the Coast Guard in the development of the MTSA regulations and I did. NO misrepresentations were made. YOU made the false claim that I didn't know the Coast Guards involvement in the development of the MTSA and its relation to the ISPS and the SOLAS. It's brutal, but on a website such as this one you'd best prepare to be shamed.

[1rudeboy]

You told me to prove the involvement of the Coast Guard in the development of the MTSA regulations and I did.

I asked you to prove what portion of our security was compromised. You replied that the Coast Guard went to the IMO. Thanks for pointing that out, Captain Obvious. I'd really have started to worry if it had gone to NASA.

[hedgetrimmer]

Please demonstrate where, specifically, our maritime security strategy was compromised

Ultimately, a series of intersessional maritime security work group meetings, held at the direction of the Maritime Safety Committee

Why don't you tell us who was in the working group?And in the Maritime Safety committee. Names and countries please.

[1rudeboy]

Now you want me to help you make your argument? LOL

[1rudeboy]

Before each intersessional meeting, the Coast Guard held public meetings in the U.S. and coordinated several outreach meetings with representatives from major U.S. and foreign associations for shipping, labor, and port authorities. We also discussed maritime security at each of our Federal Advisory Committee meetings and held meetings with other Federal agencies with security responsibilities.

[hedgetrimmer]

No you printed some drivel from the Heritage Foundation that misrepresented the origins of the security standards as being adopted from US maritime laws, when the opposite is true.

I showed you that the US code was copied directly from the ISPS. That my friend is a usurpation of the authority of congress and the US Constitution.

[hedgetrimmer]

No, you should prove your assertion that no enemy nations belong to the SOLAS and none participate in working groups where code for our laws is originated.